Duvduv

Come on, AA, you know one cannot prove a negative........!!
And the lack of mention of x, y, z is not empirical evidence one way or the other. All it can do is provide the basis for a hypothesis and speculation.
Secondly, you cited:

aa5874

What absurdity!! You really don't know what you are talking about.

If you were charged with a crime which you did NOT commit then you imply that it cannot be proven that you are NOT Guilty.

It is common throughout the world for defendants to be found NOT Guilty.

Essentially, it is expected that a defendant's attorney can reasonably prove or show that he did NOT commit a crime due to LACK of evidence.

Now, unless the 4th century Forgers were complete IDIOTS and simultaneously suffered from AMNESIA then we would expect to mention the Four named Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline Corpus, and the succession of Bishops in the writings attributed to Justin to give the appearance that he knew the History of the Jesus cult.

The writings attributed to Justin show a Big Black Hole of the History of the Jesus cult between the ascension and up to c 133 CE.

Justin wrote BEFORE the Big Black Hole was filled.

Duvduv

Why do you assume that such writers would have to be so organized in an early polemical woto such as theJustin texts??

aa5874

I assume nothing. I show you what is attributed to writers of antiquity.

Is it not implied in "Against Celsus" 1 that Celsus wrote NOTHING of Paul?

Origen's Against Celsus Not only did Celsus FORGET to write about Paul and the Four Gospels but also Aristides, Justin, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Municius Felix, and Arnobius.

Only an IDIOTIC 4th century forger suffering from Amnesia would have forgotten to write about Paul and the Four named Gospels in writings attributed to Christian cults.

Justin's Memoirs of the Apostles" was composed before the History of the Jesus cult was invented by the 4th century Christian cult.

Duvduv

Not necessarily amnesia at all. There could be other reasons which we have discussed already a few times at the dawn of the emergence of the Christian belief system and doctrines.
However, I would not say that the author(s) of the Justin writings were such great geniuses. The quality of the argumentation and content is rather poor on its own merits and would seem to have been written by the equivalent of a new undergraduate or perhaps a high school senior.
Unfortunately no manuscripts are available other than what was in the possession of the priest in the middle ages (cod. Paris, 450, AD 1364).

And nothing really significant about him or these texts comes in the name of ancient writers except for our good old friend Eusebius. And Eusebius makes Justin sound like the same kind of "Christian" as Eusebius ("us") which he wasn't, and doesn't quote much from this great "Christian" except a few lines from Trypho. Eusebius doesn't even explain how he knows the assorted writings are actually allegedly from a second century Justin altogether. It is also rather amazing that the church would accept the statement attributed to Eusebius about Justin given the fact that the differences between the Church and Justin in terms of Christian beliefs was greater than between the Church and Arians, and yet Justin's writings are acceptable and the Arians were expunged.

So what's there to say really amid all this confusion?

aa5874

You really don't know what you are talking about. You are exposing your confusion.

The claim that Justin was a Christian in the 2nd century does NOT help to show that there was a 1st century Jesus cult of Christians.

Eusebius did NOT admit that there was a Gospel called the Memoirs of the Apostles NOR did he acknowledge that Justin used the Memoirs of the Apostles.

Essentially, Eusebius USED Justin as a witness of HERETICS.

Eusebius fundamentally used IRENAEUS for the History of the Jesus cult up to the late the 2nd century.

1. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin]for the names of the authors of the Four Canonised Gospels.

2. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] for the Chronology of authorship for the Four Gospels.

3. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] for dating the Four Gospels.

4. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] for the authorship, dating and chronology of Acts of the Apostles.

5. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] for the authorship, dating and chronology of the Pauline Corpus.

6. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] for the names and chronology of the Bishops of Rome.

7. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] when he mentioned the writings of POLYCARP.

8. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] when he mentioned the writings of CLEMENT of Rome.

9. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] when he mentioned the writings of PAPIAS.

10. Eusebius used IRENAEUS [Not Justin] when he mentioned the Martyrdom of Bishops up to the late 2nd century.

Only an IDIOTIC forger suffering from AMNESIA would write 'First Apology' and 'Dialogue with Trypho' and forget to mention the History of the Jesus cult but instead acknowledged the Memoirs of the Apostles and Simon Magus the First God and Founder of All Christian Heresies since the time of Claudius.

Duvduv

I was simply referring to the mentions of "Justin" in the writings of Eusebius, Church History, Book IV. That's it.

aa5874

I was simply referring to the fact that Eusebius did NOT use Justin to establish the History of the Jesus cult.

Examine the same Church History Book IV and you will see that Eusebius used Justin to ESTABLISH the teachings of MARCION and TATIAN--NOT the Jesus cult bishops.

It was Justin who established that there were Christians who were NOT like Eusebius. There were Christians who BLASPHEMED the name of Jesus aND were operating under the power of the Demons.

[u]Church History 4. Only an IDIOTIC forger suffering from Amnesia would have forgotten to make sure that Justin mentioned the names of the authors of the Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline Corpus, Polycarp, Clement, Papias and the Bishops of the Jesus cult.

The writings attributed to Justin are evidence AGAINST the History of the Jesus cult of Eusebius and show that the Memoirs of the Apostles were composed BEFORE there were Gospels called gMatthew, gMark, gLuke anf gJohn.

Essentially, Justin had an early version of what was LATER called the Diatessaron.

Even, Eusebius ADMITTED that Tatian who had a copy of the Diatessaron was a follower of Justin.

Examine Church History Book 4

Church History 4. 29